Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

I was very close to buying the CP33 but now there is this new model im being told about, the Yamaha P-155 which costs the same amount! Would I be wise to go ahead and get the cp33 or is this new piano better in some way I might have missed?

Doesn't the p155 have speakers and 128 polyphony? I have a cp33, and I don't think it's sound could be any better, and its action is just right for me. It's 64, but I have never had a note drop. You'd be OK with either, IMO.

_________________________
"She loves to limbo, that much is clear. She's got the right dynamic for the New Frontier"http://roadhouseallstars.com/

I think they might have different action? I can't be sure because I haven't actually seen a P155. But I was told while I was picking between P140, CP33 and CP300 that the CP33 keyboard has some ability to overshoot the note? I didn't quite understand but apparently it's used for string instruments.

I just purchased the p155 from musiciansfriend.com they have a deal til the 15th that cuts 200 dollars off the final price for all yamaha pianos over 1 grand in price. had no tax too so the final price with shipping was $1019 I am happy I cant wait til this thing shows up

I have read some posts about pretty loud thumping of p155 hammers. The cp33 seems to have the same keyboard, but I cannot test it, because my local dealers have not this model in stock. I have got impression that the clp 320 is a bit quieter than p155.

Hence I'm wondering whether cp33 is quieter or not. I'm afraid that this thumping will disturb me and my neighbors. I'd be grateful if someone who tested both could comment on this.Is this noise audible when playing with headphones? Or should I just stop worrying and order p155?

I have a P-120 which is the predecessor of the P-140 and now the P-155.

I find it's worth it to have speakers on a piano. I use it at home, stage and in studio, and in most situations I use them.

For home use, I find it's nice to have sound come out of the piano even if I have nice studio monitors on the side. It is simpler and It makes for a better experience.

On stage, It depends on the situation, but on most small stages I still prefer to keep them and keep a little control. Again, where your comes from is important. If my soundtech doesn't want them, I can just mute them. On my P-120, I can put the speaker switch to off but you can also put a headphone adapter in the headphones output to do the same and still have the sound come out of the main outputs.

In studio, I just mute them with the above mention trick.

Personnally, I think it's better to have speakers because there are many situations when you will want them. Isn't nice to just turn the piano on and play sometimes?

Is this noise audible when playing with headphones? Or should I just stop worrying and order p155?

Yes, because it is the mechanical noise of the keys. It doesn't change whether you have internal speakers, external speakers, headphones, or the power switched off. Any time you play a key with a touch greater than pianissimo, you get that soft thump.

Some people are bothered by this, others, like me, are not. I don't notice it at all when I am playing with headphones on or my monitors at a moderate volume. The only time you should really worry is when you have people living below you, because the noise tends to transmit through the keyboard stand and in to your floor (their ceiling). All weighted keyboards have some thump. It is a necessary evil when you have moving parts. Unless you want the bottom travel of your key to feel like a sponge, you will get a moderate thump.

I agree that onboard speakers are sometimes nice to have, not for the sound necessarily, but because they transmit a nice natural-feeling vibration in to the keys. The price difference between the P-155 and CP33 is simply a balancing act. The CP has fewer sampling layers and no internal speakers, but a more stage-friendly user interface. The P-155 has ok internal speakers, more sampling layers, polyphony and voices, but a more casual user interface. It is also built more decoratively. I believe the P-155 has fewer I/O connections since it is marketed as a home piano. They're built for different uses, so the price isn't saying that one is necessarily better or worse than the other. It just depends on what you're using it for. I am pretty sure that both models share the same action.

I have read some posts about pretty loud thumping of p155 hammers. The cp33 seems to have the same keyboard, but I cannot test it, because my local dealers have not this model in stock. I have got impression that the clp 320 is a bit quieter than p155.

Hence I'm wondering whether cp33 is quieter or not. I'm afraid that this thumping will disturb me and my neighbors. I'd be grateful if someone who tested both could comment on this.Is this noise audible when playing with headphones? Or should I just stop worrying and order p155?

All piano make a "thump" even acoustic pianos but it's just that you can't hear the thump sound because the notes are playing. When people say a "loud" thump they don't mean it is so loud it can be heard in the next room. A shut door will pretty much silence even a bad case. You will be able to hear it only if you turn the volume down very low otherwise the sound of the notes will overpower and you can't notice. However if you are playing with headphones while you will not hear it others in the same room will be able to hear but as I said those in other rooms likely will not.

All the better Yamahas, the CLPxxx, CPxx and P155 have keyboards that are very, very close to each others.

Buy the P155 if the intended use is practice at home. The CP33 is a better stage piano. The P155 has slightly better sound with an additional velocity layer and some other things but the controls on the CP33 are better suited for use on stage.

The CP33 lacks speakers. You'd need to add a pair. Note the comment above about how studio monitors don't really give you the "piano experience". That is correct. Monitors sound like headphones. The P155's built-in speakers are not at all like studio monitors. They are "not to bad" as long as you keep the volume down. As I said the P155 is suitable for home practice. The P155 will sound much more impressive and piano-like if you add some larger (full size) speakers and a good sized amp.

Don't worry to much about a "thump" sound that is just what happens if you play forcefully with the sound turned off. Try this experiment: Play the top of your desk as if it were a piano. Even that will make a thumping noise, no way around it. The sound if fingers on the desk is louder what you get with fingers on a piano.

Actually I'm a cs student - not a musician. Switching from a keyboard. I'm living in a flat currently (having neighbors below) so hopefully putting some towels or something under the stand would muffle this noise a bit.

Through past month I've done some thorough research reading manuals and specs . Actually p155 has one headphones connector more, there is "usb to device" instead of "usb to host" and also fc-4 instead of fc-3 pedal.

Just to make sure... studio monitors will give you better sound quality than the P-155 speakers. No question about that. However, it's also important to have the monitors properly placed. It just feels more natural when sound comes out of your instrument or at least very close from it.

The ideal digital piano experience I guess would be to have monitors on your piano if possible, or use the monitors AND the piano speakers.

In regards to the thumping, I remember having this exact problem with neighbors below, even if I played with headphones. So I put pads under the stand legs and between the piano and stand, and it was ok.

Yesterday I compared the Yamaha P95/155/CP33 side by side w/ headphones and w/o (P95/P155 only). My sister kindly assisted me so we tried each. (Note: my syster is a pro jazz/pianist and has university degree in classical piano and vocals, visit: http://www.myspace.com/tamarazene)

To make a long story for short, I ended up with the CP33 after 1.5 hours of practicing. Why you may ask. It's the oldest model of all, 64 poly "only" (if I were so skilled that this were be the only bottleneck...), 10+ sounds only, no eq, no string resonance (not even on the P155, no damper resonance (P155), no GH3 (P155)...

So why?

- ACTION: It had the BEST action ever tried (note: I also like Roland's PHAIII, hate PHAII alpha (the light version of PHAII), almost sold for a Kawai CN33 as it's RM w/ escapement action is sooo cool btw, and highly recommended!!!))My sister said: it's perfect (she said this 3 times once we left the shop), it is virtually indistinguishable from a real Acoustic Piano. Longer travel distance than Rolands and Kawai, really heavy action which helps controlling ppp-fff extremely well. My syster asked the rep if the CP33 has a newer action compared to the P155. He said yes and it is supposed to be better on paper. In fact there was a clear consensus among us and the rep that the CP33 (regardless of marketing) was clearly superior, it even puts the P155 in shame.

- SOUND: the Grand AP sound was incredible. No resonance that's true but apart from that it just killed the P155. No kidding! Greater (almost twice?) ROM size for the grand piano sample, so open, so wide, so rich, so talking! Delicious! The sound of the P155 was also very good but compared to the CP33, it was something that would like to come out of the box but it is stuffed in there. The sound of the CP33 was completely the opposite, the tones were free ! My syster said 'it's like a grand with it's touch and sound, and the sound is completely controllable by the class leading action. She tried various classical parts and se just said: perfect. Needless to say she hates DPs of any kind. (except this one since yesterday )

ACTION: It had the BEST action ever tried (note: I also like Roland's PHAIII, hate PHAII alpha (the light version of PHAII), almost sold for a Kawai CN33 as it's RM w/ escapement action is sooo cool btw, and highly recommended!!!))My sister said: it's perfect (she said this 3 times once we left the shop), it is virtually indistinguishable from a real Acoustic Piano. Longer travel distance than Rolands and Kawai, really heavy action which helps controlling ppp-fff extremely well. My syster asked the rep if the CP33 has a newer action compared to the P155. He said yes and it is supposed to be better on paper. In fact there was a clear consensus among us and the rep that the CP33 (regardless of marketing) was clearly superior, it even puts the P155 in shame.

As far as I know, and from the specs on the Yamaha web site, on paper, the action of the CP33 and the P155 should be the same: GH.

As for the sound: are you comparing internal speakers vs external speakers, or the P155 was connected to external speakers too?

..... The sound of the CP33 was completely the opposite, the tones were free ! My syster said 'it's like a grand with it's touch and sound, and the sound is completely controllable by the class leading action.

The P155 is a newer piano than the CP33. DOn't listen to sales people. look on Yamaha's web site. Basically the P155's sound is the same as the CP33 but with same added features and one more velocity layer. Are you SURE you listened to each using the same speakers/headphones. It is a totally unfair test to compore a set of $600 speakers to the built-in speakers of the P155.

The key actions are the same If there are difference it is likely a unit to unit variation. Perhaps one has been played more in the store and the other is newer.

That said there are good reasons to own a CP33. It has a lot better MIDI functions and some of the controls are brought up out of the function codes system and given physical knobs. For example the relative volume of the each layer in a layered sound is a PIA to adjust on the P155 but easy on the CP33. The other good thing aabout the Cp33 is the $200 lower price, exactly enough to buy a pair of those Polk M50 speaker I use.

I have looked the Yamaha website before and since then. In fact maybe the samples are similar or same or should have more velocity layers but _still the output of the CP33 was completely in different league_ to say the least. Even the best sample set and the most sophisticated modelling algorythm worth nothing if the D/A converters, amplifiers and the whole output circuit set is not capable of resolving the nuances of the samples. I think this is the case with the P155.

I say this because we (me any my syster) have spent about 1.5 hours comparing the two (and the P95 a bit) and the result was clear, output and richness-wise the CP33 was just a different category. As for the action, there is a clear difference between the two despite the flyers, maybe the mechanics are the same (counterweights, springs etc) but the keybed responded differently when the key hits the bottom. I think manufacturers can archieve different end2end results by incorporating the same mechanics (GH or GH3 whatever etc) but putting the whole construct into a different case/keybed/base or alike. Likewise the sound: outstanding output D/A levels driven by the same (or improved) samples give outstanding final results.Yet another to the table are the filters or effects maybe: as with the D/A stack, the quality of the effects (reverb variations) adds (or deducts) from the final output.

Another word on the sound front: (besides the default Grand Piano) other tones are also outstanding. Jazz organs, Church organs, awesome Electric Pianos. Strings and Choir, masterpiece samples. Have tested the Roland F110, RD110, Kawai CN33, ES6 for example and the same sample categories built into these instruments listed are weak, plain, common and average when compared to the CP33. So detailed, so fine-grained, so detailed (again) samples, I came to the conclusion that I have never heard a real (perfectly faithfully sampled) EP and jazz organ before, that's all. The impression was analogous to the first encounter with the first wavetable synthesis (Soundblaster 2.0, Gravis UltraSound ) PC soudcard, with our FM-synthesis-educated ears (AdLib etc). Good old days

Finally: build quality, solid finish, materials and the overall feel of the CP33: "made for being used extensively" or "for life ". Even a WWII tigger tank had less steel and metal in it when compared to the CP33

All I can say is that despite the website content, these are two different instruments of a different league, at least based on our extensive testing.P155 is mainly a very advanced sohpisticated and outstanding instrument for advanced or even very-very skilled pianist, at home, with friends or even in the studio at times, whereas CP33 is for pros -n and pros on the move - (I'm still not at a pro level to be honest) it is a professional instrument, it is an "industrial class category" piano.

As for the testing: altough the P155 has onboard speakers, our comparison was made by using my trusty Sennheiser HD497 headphones.

- ACTION: It had the BEST action ever tried (note: I also like Roland's PHAIII, hate PHAII alpha (the light version of PHAII), almost sold for a Kawai CN33 as it's RM w/ escapement action is sooo cool btw, and highly recommended!!!))My sister said: it's perfect (she said this 3 times once we left the shop), it is virtually indistinguishable from a real Acoustic Piano. Longer travel distance than Rolands and Kawai, really heavy action which helps controlling ppp-fff extremely well.

Hi, hannibal2,

I have two questions:

1. If you want to get something with Yamaha GH action, the cheapest model (around here, at least) is YDP-161.(~250 000 HUF) Did you test it? Why did you decide against it?

2. May I ask what did your syster say about the Kawai CN33?Did she like it?

in your original post you wrote the CP33 has GH versus the P155 has GH3.This is uncorrect. Like it is that the CP33 has a newer action with respect the P155, which cannot be since the CP33 is at least two years older than the P155.

As for the keybed responding differently this doesn't change the fact that on paper, and as from the specs on the Yamaha website, the two actions are the same.

Sorry, I checked the CP33 manual and it says GH, even tough you are correct that on paper they might be the same. On paper indeed. At the very end it's all about personal preference and both the P155 and CP33 actions are outstanding onces, still I think the CP33 is slightly better in some way. I could tell the difference in a blind test I'm 100% sure. Something is not the same, maybe the keybed or maybe the whole frame/body of the keybed might be more massive I don't know.

We could easily spot where the secret is by using a saw but I'm too happy with my CP33 at the mo' and I don't have the cash to buy a P155 just for autopsy purposes

Back to your original question: she said what I have said: CN33 has great onboard speakers, has a nice sounding especially when situated in a large hall (like concert hall) (check by yourself at: www.tuttohangszer.hu all Kawais are present in a large concert-like room with plently of space.)She had two objections with fall in line with mines:- the GP sounds are slightly metallic especially when using headphones- despite being metallic at specific sections, still not bright (vs. Yamahas, incl P85! which is 'just' an entry model!) and still not open, has no 'air', sounds rendered (just as Roland RD201, or F110m and Roland 300GX for ex)- when playing classical music, series of notes does not form an organic flow but are of separate rendered strikes (not sure if I could phrase this any better) (vs. SuperNatural or just sampled Yamahas for ex)- keyboard touch is great, she admitted altough her first observation was that the key travel distance is shorter than most APs and uprights. There were uprights and grands in the store so it took 10 seconds to double check. To be honest this is the case with all Rolands as well and I think this is not a problem just a difference between manufacturers. Maybe Kawai grands and Yamaha grands differ in travel distances in the first place which does not make Yamaha better, nor Kawai worse it's just an interesting fact. (altough she said it usually gives her more room in controlling expressions during playing, but as I said she is a pro whereas I'm not and also thousands of pro use non-Yamaha keybeds all around a world...)- she said the ivory touch is a gimmick and makes no difference at least not the way it is applied on the CN33 nor on the CN33. She recorded her first album with a hammer action DP with plastic keys, no ivory. As for let-off, she said it does not affect her playing nor positively nor in a negative way. (irrelevant)- she preferred a portable edition (this is where MP6 would be nice to have a test but it is expected to arrive in December here in Budapest)- design is great (housing, furniture-wise I mean)

Honestly I was expecting striking reactions which was the case but apropos of the Yamaha CP33 later that afternoon...

Maybe the Kawai CA63/93 are different beast, but they were way out of budget.

Szia Csillag, [...] CN33 has great onboard speakers, has a nice sounding especially when situated in a large hall (like concert hall) (check by yourself at: www.tuttohangszer.hu all Kawais are present in a large concert-like room with plently of space.)

Yeah, I know the place. (See my report here.) The hall is great, but they only have a few models on show; I could not test CL35, CN23, CA93 (or MP6, MP10, CA13)

Quote:

Maybe the Kawai CA63/93 are different beast, but they were way out of budget.

Yeah, same here.

* * *

Three more questions:

1. when you write "yamahas on another store not too far from there", which shop do you mean? According to my research, the one closest to the Kawai dealer is MezzoForte - still about half an hour drive...

Indeed but what's even more important: myself was impressed too in the first place.

I still can't beleive my ears _how detailed_ the samples are in the CP33. You can hear the sound of the drive of the leslie speaker in the JazzOrgan sample if you listen very very carefully. Key-off samples are also nice in the AP patch. The 'attack' phase of the grand patch samples are also more articulated.

And also despite some looping in the CP33 (Kawai was a bit better in this respect) the piano sound is just very expressive.

I wish I had the money for the CA63/93... but I think all I would look in those flagship models is the same sample quality of the CP33...

I was still impressed by the onboard sound of the CN33, maybe the best in it's class, no Roland DP201 nor F110 come close to it for example.

Still curious about the Kawai MP6 when it hits the stores here! MP6 is going to be a big hit I think!

the P155 and CP33 actions are outstanding onces, still I think the CP33 is slightly better in some way. I could tell the difference in a blind test I'm 100% sure.

I think it's very hard (for a human) to compare _solely_ the keyboards of two instruments, because the sound is "leaking in", and influences the results psyhologically. This is why it is often advised to set vol=0 or simply power off the insruments before doing such comparison. (On other solution is to use the same software piano with both keyboards.)

Now, what method did you use to compare the keyboards of the P155 and the CP33?

A) test them with their built-in sound B) test them powered offC) test them with software piano

?

Anyway, did you check the YDP-161? (It's the cheapest Yamaha with the same GH action, around ~250 000 HUF - 1250 USD)

I wonder how it's keyboard compares to the P155 and the CP33, according to your senses...

I think it's very hard (for a human) to compare _solely_ the keyboards of two instruments, because the sound is "leaking in", and influences the results psyhologically. This is why it is often advised to set vol=0 or simply power off the insruments before doing such comparison. (On other solution is to use the same software piano with both keyboards.)

That's an interesting point. But also, I think, far more relevant in some circumstances than others.

If you're going to use a keyboard for triggering sounds that reside in other keyboards, sound modules, or a computer, I would agree that testing without listening to a board's internal sounds would be a good idea.

However, if a keyboard is only going to be used to trigger its internal sound, then how it feels independently of that sound isn't really relevant.

And I say this not just because evaluating a device logically should be centered on how you intend to use it, but also because a manufacturer can engineer the key response and tailor a sound specifically to achieve a desired result out of the particular combination. It's one of the benefits of using a keyboard with its own sound. Not that every manufacturer necessarily does specifically alter something about the keyboard or the sound specifically to make the combination work as well as it can, but at least it's *possible* that they can do this, and in at least some cases, they apparently do.

There was an interesting review of a Korg PS60 synth in Keyboard magazine... it's not a DP, of course, but it illustrates the concept. The reviewer said, "When I placed the PS60 front and center in my studio, and before turning it on, I thought its synth-action keys were way too light and that they bottomed out too softly. Why do I mention this? Because you might make the same judgment if you encounter the PS60 at a retailer where they don’t keep every unit plugged in. After I spent some time playing (what a concept!), a whole new impression confronted me. The PS60 impressed me as much with its keys-to-sound connection as the vastly more expensive Yamaha CP1 stage piano. Granted, it’s a completely different feel from anybody’s piano-weighted keys, but the PS60’s keys are a pleasure to play because—and this is important—their response is so tightly integrated with the internal synth engine. Many of the source samples, if they don’t actually feature a dozen or so velocity layers, feel as if they do. It’s so bloody easy to be musical." (Article at http://www.keyboardmag.com/article/korg-ps60/October-2010/120475 )

Playing some keyboards simply feels more "musical" than playing others... some allow you to play with more expression, for some reason that is not necessarily obvious, and similarly, I have also had the experience where some pianos more convincingly make you feel like you're playing a real instrument rather than almost like playing a "recording" of an instrument, and I'm not sure whether that's really necessarily a function of the sound itself, I think it may also have to do with this kind of sound-feel connection. And it would be a difference that would not show up in any sound sample you would hear of someone else playing (or a MIDI file), because it may not be the sound itself that is the issue; it would show up only when you put your fingers to the keys, since it is instead a difference in how the sound connects to the feel. It's probably some combination of software velocity scaling, where in the travel the sensors are, total key travel, and perhaps other things... but optimizing the combination is only possible when all these factors are known by the manufacturer.

So if you're auditioning DPs for the purpose of using them "stand-alone," then I would say you should focus on the feel of its keys while playing its internal sounds, rather than on how they feel with no sound at all. The sound then isn't introducing a "bias" that is preventing you from properly evaluating the keyboard feel, rather a lack of sound may be preventing you from judging the entirety of the feel that was engineered into it. The key action that feels better with no sound can be the wrong choice if that's not how you're using it.

I think it's very hard (for a human) to compare _solely_ the keyboards of two instruments, because the sound is "leaking in", and influences the results psyhologically. This is why it is often advised to set vol=0 or simply power off the insruments before doing such comparison. (On other solution is to use the same software piano with both keyboards.)

That's an interesting point. But also, I think, far more relevant in some circumstances than others.

If you're going to use a keyboard for triggering sounds that reside in other keyboards, sound modules, or a computer, I would agree that testing without listening to a board's internal sounds would be a good idea.

However, if a keyboard is only going to be used to trigger its internal sound, then how it feels independently of that sound isn't really relevant.

[...]

So if you're auditioning DPs for the purpose of using them "stand-alone," then I would say you should focus on the feel of its keys while playing its internal sounds, rather than on how they feel with no sound at all. The sound then isn't introducing a "bias" that is preventing you from properly evaluating the keyboard feel, rather a lack of sound may be preventing you from judging the entirety of the feel that was engineered into it. The key action that feels better with no sound can be the wrong choice if that's not how you're using it.

I agree with this; if you are going for the built-in sounds, that it's best to test the DP with it, so you can get a full impression.

But (as I have stated several times) I indend to keep the DP I am going to buy for a long time (10-15 years, at least), and I am positive that the software pianos will get _much_ better by then (they already are), so I am 99.9% sure that I will end up using one eventually.

Therefore, my only real concern with the DP I am going to by is the keyboard action. (Everything else is dead weight, in the long run.) If this option existed, I would probably get a MIDI controller only - but neither Roland, nor Yamaha or Kawai is selling a MIDI controller with actions comparable to the ones used in the proper DPs. (I don't trust the NUMA line.)

True, if one uses a keyboard and the sound engine from a different source, it can be quite a challenge to configure everything in a way that things really come "alive". However, with some trial-and-error, this definitly can be done. (There are several such success stories on these forums. too.)

Since the results can be _way_ better than any currently available built-it sound, this is what I indend to do.

Hello All [...] ended up with the CP33 [...] ACTION: It had the BEST action ever tried (note: I also like Roland's PHAIII, hate PHAII alpha (the light version of PHAII),

Could you please detail your impressions about Roland a little bit more?

As think most serious players here would agree that one can safely discard the PHA-alpha-II stuff.

Then there is PHA-II, PHA-II+esc, PHA-III+esc.

If you are not intereted in the escapement (as you have stated), and want to stay low low on the budget, then I think it would make sense to check out the available (discontinued, hence relatively cheap) PHA-II models: HP-201 and FP-7.

Did you manage to check these out? How did you like them? What was the factor that made the CP-33 the winner agains (for example) FP-7 ?